中美貿易戰

--川普向中國拉開貿易戰序幕: 叫罵示威。

-- 倫敦經濟學人雜誌冷眼看穿。

林中斌 2018.4.3

僥倖言中
五個月前戰況失利，五個月後情勢逆轉

●2017年10月13日 《聯合報》名人堂 林中斌「王岐山十九大應會留任」
●2017年10月26日中共十九大落幕
●2017年10月28日《聯合報》：「前國防部長林中斌(1中0)命中率零…林中斌曾預估，習近平最依重的王岐山應會留任….」
(“中國新核心 調查局猜中一半 國安會狀況外？”《聯合報》 2017年10月28日)
●2018年3月17日《中時電子報》： 「習近平全票連任國家主席王岐山當選副主席」

敬請賜教
林中斌 2018.3.17

南北韓統一潛流逐漸浮現

●當南北韓意外的開始正面互動時，全世界都熱鬧的反應時，北京卻出奇的安靜。
●當時在下私下與朋友表示: 北京應已知曉南北韓將接觸。文在寅訪中時已告訴習近平與北韓互動之苗頭;而北韓雖表面慍中，私下應已照會北京與南韓接觸之苗頭。
●兩三年前有山東某蘇姓?教授公開建議習: 應樂見南北韓統一，否則自我矛盾。。因為南北韓統一與兩岸統一的道理相通。
--2014年10月底在首爾國際會議中有中國國防大學戰略研究所副研究員鹿音上校表示，中國希望看到同屬一國的、幸福的南北韓國民。(王崑義教授觀察2014.11.4旺報)
●在下竊以為尚有其他考量。
● 兩韓若統一，則美國失去在東亞部署軍力之立場。1950年6月25日北韓侵略南韓，引動美軍介入，以至於今。
●也有人說：若南北韓統一，強勁的南韓經濟會被拖累，約有10年。那是根據東西德統一後的經驗。於是，統一後的韓國會更依賴中國，對北京有利。在下以為：這是短視的想法，不足為取。長遠對北京有利的做法應令韓國人樂於與中國為鄰。
●以上淺見，敬請賜教。

林中斌 2018.3.27

北韓最高領導人金正恩有可能閃電訪問大陸。日本電視台26日下午拍到抵達北京的北韓列車，這節列車與2011年金正日訪問大陸時搭乘的特別列車極為相似。金正恩此刻若訪北京，被認為是在5月「川金會」前，先與北京進行溝通。

而據丹東當地知情人士透露，金正恩昨下午5、6點從丹東入境北京，昨丹東火車站及鴨綠江大橋戒備，緊鄰鴨綠江畔的中聯大酒店全部遭到管制，所有入住的旅客全部被清空，飯店緊鄰江邊一側的房間窗戶全部緊閉；金正恩已抵達北京。

以北韓新聞為主的電子媒體《Daily NK Japan》26日晚報導，北韓與大陸邊境的丹東被察覺有不尋常動態，丹東車站設置巨大的隔板牆，讓人感受警備森嚴的氣氛，當地人傳說，「北韓黨委員長金正恩來了？」，難道是北京的「特別列車」抵達了嗎？

25日的上午和下午，當地的大陸公安局在車站周邊進行了波紋狀路障的開關演習，到了下午10點還封閉了車站，以及北韓與大陸連接的鴨綠江大橋（道路、鐵路併用橋）。

當地消息人士指出，「從晚間10點起，丹東站就完全關閉，約在20分至40分之間，由21節車廂組成的列車朝瀋陽方向駛去」。

就在這4天前，有人看到似北韓人民軍所屬的船隻在鴨綠江大橋周邊待機。當地消息人士表示，「2011年當時的金正日總書記搭乘的列車經過丹東站時，北韓軍隊也在鴨綠江大橋附近監視。這次的氣氛與當時非常相似。」

金正日2011年訪問大陸8天，便是搭乘火車走從北京出發，經瀋陽、丹東再返回北韓的路線。當時丹東站也是完全封閉，且在鴨綠江大橋周邊也部署了公安和邊防警備隊。

有丹東的市民對這次的情形表示，「聽說因為有北韓高官來，故加強國境的管制」、「25日晚間10點起，警戒更加升級」。至於高官是誰並不清楚，但從北韓出發的特別列車在嚴峻的警戒態勢下的深夜通過，應該是最高層級的高官吧。

在北京也感受到緊張的氣氛。北京的消息人士指出，1周前大陸外交部與駐北京的北韓大使館相關人士舉行罕見的全體會議等，是值得關注的動作。消息人士指，「談的是和以往不同的事，不久之後，應會傳中朝關係改善等好消息。」

如果金正恩訪問大陸的話，與大陸國家主席習近平會談的可能性相當高。

加拿大的川普將竄起政壇

Stephen Marche New York Times March 22, 2018

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/opinion/doug-ford-populism-canada-trump.html

accessed March 22, 2018

加拿大今年6月7日安大略省選舉極可能出現像川普的新省長Doug Ford。他目前在民調中遙遙領先47% 只有26%的對手。(請見貼在樓上的紐約時報評論 Will Canada Elect a Tin-pot Northern Trump?)

●一本心靈書(出版2017年11月屬系列的第四本)中開悟的老師預言未來世界說:將來會有更多crazy people winning election(p.129)。之前在第一本2002出版書"再見娑婆"(The Disappearance of the Universe )曾說2012.12.21 非世界末日，但會有許多災變。(更重要的是開悟的老師說: 無論發生任何災變，勿忘寬恕:"just be ready to forgive no matter what.")

Toronto — Tell me if you’ve heard this before: The spoiled son of a sprawling business dynasty positions himself as an anti-elite populist. During a pivotal campaign, he brushes off a history of crude remarks as political incorrectness to the delight of his base. Then, running against the establishment of his own party and an evidently more qualified female candidate, he loses the popular vote but manages, by way of an arcane voting system, to take power.

No, I’m not rehashing the victory of President Trump. I’m describing the rise of Canadian politician Doug Ford, who this month was elected leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, the right-of-center opposition in the country’s most populous province. With his party leading in the polls ahead of a June 7 election, Mr. Ford has a strong chance of becoming premier.

Trumpism, it seems, has migrated north.

Several years before the 2016 United States presidential campaign, Mr. Ford’s brother, the deceased former mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford, more or less invented the politics of boorish, divisive populism the American president has since mastered. Rob Ford figured out as early as 2010 that riding out scandal, while blaming the media and other unspecified “elites,” was a winning political strategy.

Torontonians forgave flaws in his character, appreciated them, even embraced them as signs of authenticity. It didn’t matter to his base that he smoked crack cocaine while in office. The Rob Ford era demonstrated that someone as shameless as Mr. Trump had a shot as a political figure.

Doug Ford is a more serious and self-disciplined version of his bumbling younger brother. He has resisted comparisons between himself and the president, but has also spoken fondly about The Donald. “Absolutely he respects women,” he said of the Republican presidential candidate in 2016. “There’s millions of women that have voted for him. So all those millions of women are dumb? I don’t think so.”

Mr. Ford, while much less addled than his brother was, has also been connected to Toronto’s underbelly, where Rob Ford spent so much of his time as mayor. The Globe and Mail newspaper reported in 2013 that Mr. Ford sold drugs throughout the better part of the 1980s. (He has never been charged and denies the allegations.) Thirty years later, if elected his government would be responsible for implementing Ontario’s new, legal recreational cannabis stores.

Overnight, the election of Mr. Ford crushed the smugness Canadians have been feeling since their prime minister, Justin Trudeau, appointed a cabinet of 50 percent women and became the envy of enlightened progressives the world over. The deep-seated cultural and political alienation at the root of Trump and Brexit is in full force in Canada as well.

Mr. Ford is already a front-runner. One poll has the Progressive Conservatives at 47 percent support and the incumbent Ontario Liberal Party at 26 percent. The latter, having ruled since 2003, has nearly 15 years’ worth of scandal to show for it. Rising inequality across the province, distaste for progressive rhetoric and the sense of a generalized corruption of politics as a whole is fueling, as elsewhere, a populism as inchoate as it is powerful.

And from Italy to the Philippines to Canada, this cannibalizing populism is swallowing traditional Conservatism whole. Mr. Ford snuck through to the leadership on a voting system that ranked ballots. He won neither the popular vote nor the greatest number of constituencies. But the Progressive Conservative machine is behind him already. It operates on inherited loyalties, antipathy against scandal-plagued opponents, time-for-a-change sentiments and basic self-interest.

EDITORS’ PICKS

Ideas were probably always somewhat irrelevant, so it hardly matters that the so-called Conservative parties aren’t conservative anymore. Or rather, Conservatism itself has changed. The Conservatism of law and order, of common decency and of fiscal responsibility has been rendered null and void. After the last provincial election, which the Liberals won handily, Mr. Ford, then a Toronto city councilor, prescribed “an enema from top to bottom” for the caucus he just inherited. The effluent is now lapping at his feet.

They may hope to change him. They won’t. Already, Mr. Ford, who has never held a seat in the Legislature, is boasting about a historically large victory in the offing. His bragging has an all-too familiar ring stateside. To stand with Mr. Ford is to express rage — and this rage will take its customary atavistic forms.

The current premier, Kathleen Wynne, the first lesbian elected to the post, introduced a modernized sex-education curriculum to the province’s public school systems. Just days after his election, Mr. Ford pledged to remove it, a policy that has support among some new immigrant communities, who tend to be more socially conservative.

He’s also running the standard Ford playbook. Elites are people who sip “Champagne with their pinkies in the air.” (His family’s label and packaging company is said to make tens of millions in annual sales.)

His infamous brother, when you get right down to it, was only the mayor of Toronto, which is not a very powerful position. Toronto’s “weak mayor” system ensures that its leader only gets one vote on the city council. In Canada, it’s actually the premier of a province who matters. His or her government regulates the schools and the public health care system. Do the people of Ontario really want a tin-pot northern Trump in charge of things that affect their daily lives? Canada’s Constitution calls for “peace, order and good government”; it is hard to imagine anyone who could fulfill that mandate less.

Mr. Ford’s sweep in as quiet and stable a place as Ontario points to a broader global crisis from which apparently there is no escape. Conservatism is no longer a political ideology in the recognized sense, but a repository of loathing and despair. It’s where people thrust their hatred of modernity — of globalism and multiculturalism and technocratic expertise, but also of the democracy that fostered those systems in the first place. By giving high office to buffoons, by choosing thugs as their representatives and by reveling in nastiness for its own sake, the Conservative brand now is principally a marker of contempt for political order itself.

Conservatism has meant many things to many people around the world. Now, just about everywhere, it looks a lot like a raised middle finger; Ford and friends are the latest to salute.

The Dirty Secret of America Nuclear Arms in Korea

Walter Pincus New York Times March 19, 2018

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/opinion/korea-nuclear-arms-america.html

accessed March 19, 2018

North Korea may be unreliable, but it was America that broke with the Korean armistice by introducing nuclear weapons into South Korea in 1958.
北韓 或許不可靠，然而是美國先破壞 韓戰停戰協定：1958年美國 部署核子武器進南韓。

As President Trump prepares for a possible meeting with Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, many Americans are raising warnings that North Korea has walked away from previous arms agreements. But those skeptics should remember that it was the United States, in 1958, that broke the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement, when the Eisenhower administration sent the first atomic weapons into South Korea.

By the mid-1960s, the United States had more than 900 nuclear artillery shells, tactical bombs, surface-to-surface rockets and missiles, antiaircraft missiles and nuclear land mines in South Korea. Even nuclear projectiles for Davy Crockett recoilless rifles were for several years based in South Korea.

The presence of those American weapons probably motivated the North Koreans to accelerate development of their own nuclear weapons. Although all the tactical United States nuclear weapons were removed from South Korea in 1991, the Seoul government still remains under the American nuclear umbrella — and the impetus for Kim Jong-un to have his own remains, as it did for his father and grandfather.

“The danger that U.S. nuclear weapons might be used against the North has been a central principle in its strategic thought and actions ever since,” Joseph S. Bermudez Jr., a North Korea expert, wrote in a 2015 paper.

The 1953 Korean armistice, which halted three years of bloody fighting, contained a provision that prohibited new types of weapons or ammunition to be introduced into the peninsula by either the United States-led United Nations forces, or the North Korean and Chinese forces. The armistice agreement even set up inspection teams from neutral nations to monitor incoming weapons shipments.

Image

People marched through Pyongyang, North Korea, in July of 1958 demanding the withdrawal of U.S. forces from South Korea.CreditKeystone/Hulton Archive, via Getty Images

However, declassified United States documents describe in detail how the Eisenhower administration, worried about the cost of defending South Korea and the prowess of North Korea’s Chinese-backed military, agreed to send tactical nuclear weapons systems to South Korea. In return, the administration was hoping to get the Joint Chiefs of Staff to support reducing the number of American and South Korean troops on the peninsula that the United States was financing, at a cost of about $650 million a year for the Korean troops alone.

Planning to send the atomic weapons to South Korea began in 1956. A Nov. 28, 1956, meeting involving Defense and State Department officials was titled “Defense proposal to authorize the introduction of ‘Honest John’ and the 280 millimeter gun in Korea,” according to a declassified memorandum.

According to that memorandum, the Pentagon’s general counsel argued that American soldiers in South Korea “should be permitted to have weapons of dual capability” — noting that the Honest John rocket system and the 280-millimeter gun “have both conventional and atomic capability.”

The State Department’s legal adviser, Herman Phleger, responded that the two weapons systems “would be a violation” of the armistice agreement and could not be justified as a matter of “liberal interpretation.” He added that these nuclear-capable weapons “would create an imbalance” which would violate the spirit of the agreement, especially since American officials could not establish that the North Koreans had deployed atomic weapons.

EDITORS’ PICKS

Pentagon officials argued that the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarded the introduction of the Honest John and Davy Crockett systems as “essential from a military viewpoint.” In turn they suggested that the North, by obtaining new artillery weapons and high performance aircraft, had violated the agreement and freed the United States “to disregard its restrictions.”

According to notes from a National Security Council meeting on June 13, 1957, Adm. Arthur Radford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated that military planning for South Korea could not continue “without being able to count on the use of nuclear weapons.” Eisenhower agreed that jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons should be introduced into the South. But he also noted that if the United States introduced nuclear-capable Honest John rocket systems and 280-millimeter guns to the South, they would be “so conspicuous that you would have to explain their introduction to the whole world.”

On June 21, 1957, the senior official on the United Nations Command of the Military Armistice Commission, Maj. Gen. Homer L. Litzenberg, indicated that, given the North Koreans’ alleged violations, the command would no longer consider itself bound by certain limitations in the armistice agreement. The North Korean representative at the commission described General Litzenberg’s statement as an attempt “to wreck the armistice agreement and turn South Korea into an American base of atomic warfare.”

That day, the abrogation of the weapons prohibition was announced by the United Nations Command. The New York Times reported from Panmunjom, North Korea, that during a United Nations meeting, General Litzenberg had “left the door open for the introduction in South Korea of weapons capable of firing atomic warheads.” General Litzenberg declined to say what type of weapons the organizations planned to bring in.

However, that same day in Washington, the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, Murray Snyder, told Pentagon reporters that no ground weapons capable of firing atomic warheads would be introduced. That turned out to be untrue.

At an Aug. 8, 1957, National Security Council meeting, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles said, according to meeting notes, that ending the Korea arms prohibitions “had been pretty well received throughout the Free World.” Secretary of Defense Charles Erwin Wilson said the plan to put nuclear weapons in South Korea, if adopted, “would be able to bring home approximately 8,000 American military personnel and we could cut out four active South Korean divisions, which would save us approximately $125 million a year.”

It took months to negotiate reduction of four South Korean divisions with Syngman Rhee, the South Korean president. But on Dec. 24, 1957, Army Secretary Wilber Brucker was authorized to introduce into Korea the Honest John and 280-millimeter gun “as soon as is feasible under Army deployment schedules.”

Three days later, the American Embassy in South Korea proposed announcing the arrival of the atomic-capable weapons, saying the news was “bound to become public knowledge.” The United Nations Command agreed, and at a news conference in Seoul on Jan. 28, 1958, the arrival of the atomic-capable weapons was announced. A United States Army spokesman refused to say how many cannons arrived and whether they were accompanied by atomic warheads. It was a two-paragraph story on page 3 of The New York Times.

Since then, Americans have forgotten this history and American politicians have only blamed North Korea for undermining arms agreements. Pyongyang has indeed been unreliable; but its leaders recall what happened in the 1950s, having spent 33 years facing American nuclear weapons just across the border in South Korea.

The United States does not come to any future talks with totally clean hands. Both sides have reasons to adopt Ronald Reagan’s advice: “Trust, but verify.”

With option to rule for life, China's Xi sets sights on Taiwan

CNN March 20, 2018

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/20/asia/taiwan-china-xi-jinping-intl/index.html

accessed March 20, 2018

感謝CNN 記者Joshua Berlinger ，他是西方記者中少有終於把我英文名字拼對了的。

林中斌 2018.3.20

I wish to congratulate Joshua Berlinger for spelling my name correctly, a badge of high professionalism.

Chong-Pin Lin March 20, 2018

Others spoke of a brain drain, and many see the continued integration as inevitable due to Beijing's growing economic might.
"If the trends continue, the elected government in Taiwan will have to reconsider the direction of cross-strait policy," said Chong-Pin Lin, Taiwan's former deputy minister of national defense and first vice-chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council. "I think Beijing knows that very well."
"Soft power may eventually lead to what Beijing or Xi wants, which is integration and unification," said Lin.

Hong Kong (CNN) Xi Jinping began his second term as China's president with a blunt warning for Taiwan, an island it views as a breakaway province.

"All acts and tricks to split the motherland are doomed to failure and will be condemned by the people and punished by history," Xi said Tuesday at the close of the National People's Congress, Beijing's rubber-stamp legislature.

"Every inch of our great motherland's territory cannot be separated from China," he said, drawing loud applause from his audience inside the Great Hall of the People.

The tough talk on Taiwan isn't new. But Xi now has the option to serve as president for life, meaning he can execute strategies that last decades rather than years.

That long leash could give Xi opportunity to focus on achieving something that's eluded Chinese Communist leaders for nearly seven decades since the founding of the People's Republic: regaining control of Taiwan.

"Taiwan is very important and he wants to do it within his lifetime," said Willy Lam, a professor at the Center for China Studies at the Chinese University in Hong Kong.

"If Xi Jinping can pull off this national reunification by so-called liberating Taiwan, then he has something in the history books," Lam said.

Socialism with Chinese characteristics? Beijing's propaganda explained

The democratic island of Taiwan (officially the Republic of China) is separated from mainland China (the People's Republic) by a thin stretch of water and has been self-governed since a bloody civil war ended in 1949.

Though both Taipei and Beijing view the island as part of China, neither government recognizes the legitimacy of the opposing side, with Beijing warning that it could retake the island by force if necessary.

A renewed focus by Xi on Taiwan would put China on a collision course with the United States, which has diplomatic relations only with Beijing but maintains close unofficial links with Taipei.

Washington also provides arms to the island under the Taiwan Relations Act, and has signaled closer ties with Taiwan after President Donald Trump signed a bill Friday that aims to make it easier for US officials to visit the island and Taiwan officials to visit the US.

Xi Jinping Fast Facts

Zhang Baohui, a professor of political science at Lingnan University in Hong Kong said that Taiwan could be part of Xi's motive for removing restrictions on term limits but it's not an issue he's likely to move on in the near term.

"His most important priority is domestic politics. Externally, Taiwan is secondary compared to US-Sino relations, the Korean peninsula and boosting China's leadership role in the world."

For now, what he wants is to deter Taiwan from greater independence, Zhang said, but that calculation could change should the balance of power shift between the US and China.

"After 20 years, by 2040, if China's achieved military parity then it may be feasible if they could win at a low cost."

One of China's top military leaders, Han Weiguo, the commander of the Chinese military's ground forces, said last week that Taiwan should be reunited by peaceful means but warned: "That doesn't mean the problem could be postponed indefinitely. It should be solved as quickly as possible," Han said, according to the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post.

Nationalist fervor

A pillar of Xi's leadership has been his promise of returning China to its former glory, before Western powers dealt the country a humiliating blow, starting in the Opium Wars of the 1800s, and the chaos that engulfed China throughout the early 20th Century.

Part of that promise is steeped in nationalism, and there's perhaps no other issue that whips up more nationalist fervor inside China than the issue of Taiwan.

Straying from the policy of "One China," which has governed relations between Beijing, Taipei and Washington for decades, can lead to serious consequences.

Companies like Marriott, Zara and Delta all had their websites blocked by China's censors in January after authorities found they listed Taiwan as a separate country.

The same sensitivity can be seen in Beijing's furious response to the Taiwan Travel Act, which Trump signed into law with little fanfare Friday.

The new law encourages US government officials of all levels to travel to Taiwan for official meetings and vice versa. While it has no binding legal force, it's symbolically supportive of Taiwan. Beijing has often called on the US to block visits by Taiwan's political leaders.

"China demands that the US keep its promises, rectify its wrongs, refrain from implementing relevant clauses of the bill and stop seeking any official contacts, military ties or arms sales with Taiwan, so as to avoid doing serious harm to the China-US relationship, the ties between the two countries' militaries and the peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait," Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian said Sunday.

Beijing fears developments in Taiwan that are out of its control, said Bonnie Glaser, the director of the China Power Project at Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

"Beijing is worried about the potential for Taiwan to sort of drift off in a direction toward independence," Glaser said.

"They seem to be nervous that because, in part, President Trump is unpredictable, that this could lead to a surprise ... they're particularly worried about very high level visitors from Taiwan such as the president, the minister of defense, the minister of foreign affairs," Glaser said.

Chinese President Xi Jinping was sworn in Saturday for his second term as President.

Carrots and sticks

Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen warned late last year that China's military exercises around the island had become more frequent and were affecting regional stability, according to Taiwan's state-run news agency CNA.

As of this year, Taiwan has 215,000 people in its armed forces, while Beijing counts more than two million, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies. In 2017, China's military budget was three times higher than Taiwan's.

China's military has "established a clear superiority," said Zhang, the political science professor, however he said Taiwan could still make a military conflict very costly to Beijing.

"Xi has a defensive agenda. He doesn't want to coerce reunification," he said.

Taiwan Presdient Tsai Ing-wen waves to supporters during her campaign in 2016.

But experts say soft power and economic integration appear to be the keys to Xi's plans regarding Taiwan.

During his speech Tuesday, Xi called for peaceful reunification and said China would "share opportunities" with "compatriots" in Taiwan.

China's Taiwan Affairs Office in February revealed 31 new measures it will undertake to promote exchange and cooperate with Taipei, many of which make it easier for those from Taiwan to work, do business and study in mainland China including teachers and doctors.

This view is reflected on the streets of Taipei, Taiwan's largest city, where some young people speak openly about the need for pragmatism over idealism.

"As much as we want to enjoy the freedom and democracy in Taiwan, we also want the money and the opportunities China can provide," a 22-year-old restaurant worker surnamed Wu told CNN.

However, opinion polls conducted by Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council show the vast majority of those in Taiwan favor maintaining the status quo and want China to "pragmatically face up to the fact that the Republic of China (ROC) is a sovereign state."

Others spoke of a brain drain, and many see the continued integration as inevitable due to Beijing's growing economic might.

"If the trends continue, the elected government in Taiwan will have to reconsider the direction of cross-strait policy," said Chong-Pin Lin, Taiwan's former deputy minister of national defense and first vice-chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council. "I think Beijing knows that very well."

"Soft power may eventually lead to what Beijing or Xi wants, which is integration and unification," said Lin.

A legacy risk

Analysts believe Xi is a man deeply aware of history and concerned with his legacy. He's already considered China's most powerful leader since Mao Zedong, Communist China's founding father, and has had his political doctrine included in the Chinese Communist Party's Constitution.

The longer he leads, the higher the expectations will be, argues Glaser, the academic at CSIS, and Taiwan would be the biggest prize.

"If Xi stays in power for another term or even a fourth term, then I do think that there is growing pressure on him to achieve more," she said.

注意王岐山

鄒景雯 自由時報 March 19, 2018

http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/1185128

accessed March 19, 2018

自由時報轉型。
-- "川普正式簽署台灣旅行法...是在打'台灣牌'...政府浸淫...的喜悅，只要一天就好..."

林中斌 2018.03.19

中國的領導班子底定了，透過這些人物面孔，未來五年，對岸的政經政策輪廓，已可逐步勾勒而出。果然出任國家副主席的王岐山，今後將主責中國最艱鉅的對美關係工作，儘管不按傳統國際政治牌理出牌的川普總統，近來好似不斷對習政權給出下馬威，但是面對勢必詭譎的這場博弈，台灣一定要提高警覺。

因為，台灣是局中人，不是旁觀者，不能只是輕鬆的看戲。不講別的，當美國急吼吼地要求中國削減一千億美元順差，否則不惜貿易戰開打的同時，川普正式簽署台灣旅行法案，鼓勵台美各層級官員互訪，公開提升兩國的實質關係，這個舉動，不必懷疑，當然是在打「台灣牌」，彷彿是對著北京投出高速直球，就看習近平要如何揮棒。

很清楚的，川普的目標是美國利益，「台灣牌」是他梭哈（show hand）中國的另一手。因此，政府浸淫在台灣旅行法的喜悅，只要一天就好，必須馬上集中精神掌握美中之間一切的進退，以確認台灣利益是否維持在最大化。尤其是王岐山這個人現在派上檯面，按照他過去的履歷，以及季辛吉與美國政商界長期與之打交道的觀感，他具有為中國化妝的「能力」（論理）與「實力」（籌碼），我們絕對不能大意。

這陣子，中國國台辦叫囂台灣不要「挾洋自重」，事實上，剛好相反。特別在台灣議題上，這是自一九七二年以來，中美三公報一路的本質，非得拉著美國跟他複誦一個中國，否則中國好似就無法存在一般，台灣有腦袋的人，一定要注意中國接下來會如何「挾洋自重」。

王岐山，肯定是個挾洋的高手。二○一五年，政治經濟學家福山到中南海與時任中紀委書記的王岐山有番會面，相當能反映王岐山的性格，不論外界能否同意他「中國的事情運行要很慎重」，「不能讓十三億人走懸崖峭壁」的辯護，或者即使對其所謂「司法一定要在黨的領導之下進行，這是中國特色」嗤之以鼻，也不得不承認，這名掃遍政敵的「反腐沙皇」，不但至今未被推翻，還按照習王兩人的既定劇本，一步一步，毫無偏差的，走上了讓世界開口忘闔的境地。這樣的對手，台灣勢必要有所認識。

一個研究中國歷史的人，居然可以成為處理中國經貿危機的領導人，有人這樣描繪王岐山：務實面對中國的問題，深入研究，提出解決。戰略與戰術分得清楚，明白什麼是不可讓的底線，什麼又是可以犧牲的短期利益。就算以上這是高壓統治下的溢美之詞，但是在台灣普遍看短不看長的政治文化下，我們的政治菁英需要自問，在此後的美中台棋局中，台灣維護獨立自主的戰略與戰術又是什麼？

記者引述錯誤、誤置、及漏寫

鍾麗華 自由時報 March 19, 2018

http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/paper/1185089

accessed March 19, 2018

《自由時報》2018年3月19日A2
●記者引述錯誤
"陳在陸委會任前(誤寫為任內)，曾到對岸三十多次..."
● 記者誤置
"林中斌提醒陳明通"
在下沒有提醒陳主委，只是分享觀察，是記者假我名提醒陳。
● 記者漏寫(或不敢寫)
2000-2004時的陳副主委私下對鄙人所表示的長遠未來兩岸發展看法是非常務實的。

林中斌 2018.3.19

陸委會主委陳明通今天上任，前陸委會副主委林中斌提醒，中國對台政策是長期規劃，不僅祭出對台三十一項措施，而且拉攏台灣的大學生、中學生，最近也看到中國積極與台灣小學生交流，中國軟手促統已翻天覆地來台，政府應做好準備，並以前瞻性的長期戰略來思考兩岸政策。

林中斌提醒陳明通注意

林中斌表示，他與陳明通曾在二千年至二○○二年在陸委會共事，陳在陸委會副主委任內，曾到對岸三十多次，堪稱是民進黨裡最了解中國的學者，陳對未來兩岸看法非常務實，與外面的印象截然不同。

林中斌說，雖然陳在前年政黨輪替沒有入閣，但一直提供執政團隊兩岸政策的建議與各種評估。林的消息來源告訴林，陳明通在去年中共十九大前曾給總統蔡英文一份報告，完全預測七名中國政治局常委名單，非常不簡單。林也說，陳明通對兩岸談判有個研究團隊，有一些想法與規劃、準備，陳也一直在琢磨這個問題。

林中斌提醒陳明通，中國對台政策是長期規劃，從去年十二月底，有人在台北、桃園、宜蘭等地，陸續看到穿著中國制服的小學生，與台灣的小學進行交流，這不像是零零星星的個案，而是經過縝密的規劃；如果對岸鎖定的目標是小五的學生，到了二○四九年、中共建政一百年時，這群小學生已經四十一歲，正是社會中堅，面對中國如此長期的規劃，台灣是否已準備好了？

熟悉陳明通的人士表示，陳明通從一九九○年代就開始赴中交流，在學界與實務界累積二十八年與中國交流、交往經驗，陳明通也因此累積豐富的人脈，而中國涉台系統對他並不陌生，包括張志軍、王毅都曾與陳接觸過。

淡江大學中國大陸研究所副教授張五岳表示，陳明通可在短時間掌握蔡總統的兩岸政策，也清楚民進黨對中國政策與兩岸關係的思維，今年是選舉年，相信陳擔任陸委會主委，可以讓泛綠支持者正面看待。不過，影響兩岸關係的因素非常多，不能單從兩岸人事佈局來看，包括中美互動、國際關係、區域問題等，都必須考量。

北京對台 軟手為實 硬手為虛

林中斌 名人堂稿件

日期：20180307

本文字數：1100

目標字數:1100

一四年三月爆發「太陽花學運」。七月，當時民進黨主席蔡英文塑造「天然獨」一詞，指支持獨立的青年。兩年後，她當選總統，「天然獨」功不可沒。

一五年一月，北京國務院推出「國家級創業基金」，以兩千億台幣吸引台灣青年。一六年七月十八日《商業週刊》報導：在東莞創業的台灣青年說，「他們提供免費辦公室、公寓、並附贈新台幣一百萬元創業啟動基金，免還。」一七年十一月二日《自由時報》登載：一六年底，對岸十二省市已成立四十一青創基地，入駐台資一千兩百家，吸引超過六千名台灣青年在當地就業，而地方政府自行設立二百多青創基地。

一八年一月二日，《天下雜誌》公布民調：「統一」選項首度上揚；自認台灣人的比例，下滑至五年新低。卅到卅九歲世代，支持獨立的從一七年的五十四點三趴，滑落至卅七點三趴。支持緩統的創近十年來新高，達到十三點八趴，較一七年的八點二趴顯著成長。願意去大陸工作的，有卅七點五趴，一○年來的新高點。其中廿到廿九歲者最高，達到四十三點八趴。標題是「天然獨鬆動」。

類似的民調結果，也見於一七年十一月二日《聯合報》，及今年二月十二日《遠見》。是否媒體因偏見而危言聳聽？即使民調結果屬實，是否民主自由可保台灣對抗中共？

《自由時報》不認為是。去年十一月廿二日社論：「先進國家卻已…(擁)抱中國的市場與工廠，連台灣商界也有人宣稱民主不能當飯吃。…本土政權執政，台灣認同反顯衰退…。」

前民進黨官員游盈隆博士主持的「台灣民意基金會」在去年十二月卅一日公佈民調結果：當月對蔡英文有好感的人民達四十六點九四趴；而前月對習近平有好感的達五十一點五二趴，高於蔡近五趴!

去年十月中共十九大之前，北京對台兩手策略試點。硬的有機艦繞台、巴拿馬斷交，限縮非邦交國活動，官方卻否認施壓意圖。軟的有磁吸台灣青年、專業人才、禮遇我退役官兵等操之在它的作為。十九大之後，北京一度同時加強對台兩手策略。春節前改為：軟手為主，硬手為輔，惠台擴大，壓台低調。終於在二二八高規格推出卅一項全面的「惠台措施」。

北京思維可能是：硬手策略下，台灣人民無感，甚至反感。而軟手策略下，台灣民意逆轉，突破了過去廿多年來北京對台工作的瓶頸。台灣的民主政府若禁止人民西向移動，困難重重。台灣民意若持續改變，政府抗拒調整兩岸政策會異常艱辛。

北京目前對台是：硬手防獨，軟手促統。未來可能是：硬手為虛，軟手為實。

因為硬手對促統無效，只是分散我注意力，消耗我有限資源購買昂貴武器以防共軍登台。而我真正需要的武器，賣主卻不斷拖拉。

北京對台軟手，一向被我忽略。北京認為「買台灣比打台灣便宜」的拙見一直未成我主流思維。情形有如：我部署重兵於西岸，而敵於東岸登陸，如入無人之境。

正視此挑戰是時候了。

作者為前華府喬治大學外交學院講座教授，曾任國防部副部長，甫發表新書《撥雲見日：破解台美中三方困局》

學者：汪洋將貫徹對台兩手策略

鍾麗華 自由時報 March 15, 2018

http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/paper/1184000

accessed March 15, 2018

●"未來中國促統力度更大、範圍更廣、方式更多，'從反獨的守式，轉為促統的攻勢'...。"

●昨天聯合報名人堂登載拙作"北京對台，軟手為實，硬手為虛"之後，自由時報來電訪問。此篇為訪問之結果。

●記者文字掌握中肯。

林中斌 2018.3.15

〔記者鍾麗華／台北報導〕中共政治局常委汪洋接任政協第十三屆全國委員會主席，並兼任中共中央對台工作領導小組副組長。陸委會前副主委林中斌認為，汪洋一向給人的印象是非常靈活、務實，相信汪會貫徹中共總書記習近平對台的兩手策略，並加強促統的力道；在中國祭出惠台三十一項措施後，台灣政府須正視北京「買台灣比打台灣便宜」的思維。

靈活、務實強化促統力道

林中斌指出，他從很多訊息管道聽到，習對於過去涉台工作硬邦邦、「寧左勿右」的做法很不滿意，相信汪洋未來在對台上會展現更靈活的執行方式，不會像過去那麼僵化；雖然中國對台基本立場不會改，但汪洋一定會包裝得不是那麼「霸氣」，以隱藏背後的促統動機。

林中斌強調，北京目前對台是「硬手防獨、軟手促統」，未來可能是「硬手為虛、軟手為實」，他們知道硬手對促統無效，只會引起台灣人民無感、甚至反感，因此才高規格推出三十一項惠台措施。未來也會看到中國促統力度更大、範圍更廣、方式更多，「從『反獨』的守勢，轉為『促統』的攻勢」，台灣面臨的挑戰超乎現在。

淡江大學中國大陸研究所副教授張五岳分析，汪洋在國務院副總理任內，是中美經濟安全對話的中方負責人，而即將接任國台辦主任的劉結一曾任中國常駐聯合國代表，過去國台辦主任沒人有駐美經驗，「這是北京有史以來最瞭解美國的涉台團隊」。對北京而言，在兩岸現今沒有政治互信與溝通管道下，利用對美工作、透過美國來管控兩岸關係。

不過張五岳認為，中國對台政策是要看習的理念、意志與布局，其他人都是執行者、貫徹者。在十九大後的四個月，中國祭出三十一項惠台措施，橫跨三十一個部委，若不是習的意志，以國台辦的層級很難去協調。雖然卸任與新任的涉台團隊，都是在執行習的政策，但在十九大後的開局之年，面對新情勢與新格局，以及中美關係、區域局勢的變化，習對涉台團隊的要求也會隨之調整。

習近平發動不流血革命 台學者：反腐將劍指紅二代

鄭路 新唐人 March 13, 2018

http://www.ntdtv.com/xtr/b5/2018/03/14/a1367258.html

accessed March 13, 2018

"而中華民國前國防部副部長林中斌認為，習近平過去五年是在進行「沒有流血的內部革命」，把一個鬥倒孔夫子的政權，翻轉為尊崇儒家學說的政權。習取消任期限制只是第一步，真正 ... 林中斌說，習近平可能要把黨、政、軍三駕馬車合併成一個領導人，因為別的國家也都是一個領袖。此前有傳言說他這次要改總統制 ..."

【新唐人北京時間2018年03月14日訊】北京11日修憲，成功取消國家主席任期限制，外界質疑反腐是否繼續。台灣學者認為習近平下一步將劍指紅色資本。而中華民國前官員判斷，習近平會繼續不流血革命，力推總統制，而修憲只是完成第一步。

自由亞洲電台3月12日引述台灣成功大學政治學系教授梁文韜的分析稱，北京完成修憲，中共內部已沒有人有足夠的實力挑戰他，或者說沒有人要挑戰他，這背後是否有與「大老虎」的政治交換，值得觀察。

對習近平未來是否繼續反腐，梁文韜持質疑態度。他認為，習近平已經清除完政治上的紅二代、紅三代，下一步將清除商界的紅二代、紅三代，防止有人利用這些紅色資本支持政變等反抗活動。

而中華民國前國防部副部長林中斌認為，習近平過去五年是在進行「沒有流血的內部革命」，把一個鬥倒孔夫子的政權，翻轉為尊崇儒家學說的政權。習取消任期限制只是第一步，真正目的是買時間，喘口氣，然後執行政改。

林中斌說，習近平可能要把黨、政、軍三駕馬車合併成一個領導人，因為別的國家也都是一個領袖。此前有傳言說他這次要改總統制但沒成功，內部阻力太大。

林中斌認為，習近平那個想法沒有消失，他要把整個構想翻過來。習的目標很可能跟新加坡模式比較象，就是一黨獨大的黨內民主，也就是所謂「非自由式的民主」。

台灣政治大學國關中心美歐所研究員嚴震生判斷，習近平不一定是真想要第三任、第四任，他目前只是不想讓黨內反對勢力通過一個接班人再次集結。他說，非洲很多領導人任期終身制都有一個問題，剛開始或許政局穩定，而到身體出狀況時，各股接班勢力就會難以控制。

香港《明報》近日評論文章也曾提到，習近平如果尋求延續權力，可以留任總書記或垂簾聽政，本不必在意國家主席這個虛職。而他興師動眾、不顧留下罵名也要一意孤行，很可能是想把國家主席的權力做實，演變為總統制。

日前，安邦和華信等被指權貴家族「白手套」的民企巨頭，相繼遭到整肅甚至接管，顯示出當局劍指紅色資本的跡象。此前，紅二代也被認為有邊緣化趨勢。

外界評論，中共太子黨本就不是鐵板一塊，習近平修憲觸及紅色家族的政治和經濟利益，可能會導致太子黨進一步分裂。

林中斌：大陸絕不會武統台灣

林永富 工商時報 March 13, 2018

https://m.ctee.com.tw/livenews/lm/20180313001470-260409

accessed March 13, 2018

感謝黃清龍社長的訪問，以及工商時報的文字登載。但文字登載有若干需要更正之處如下：

● “林中斌接受《POP撞新聞》主持人黃清龍訪問時說，中共修憲，把習近平思想入憲，國家主席的任期取消。能確定習近平會延任，但應不會是最後修憲，因為不能保證他能順利完成使命，所以仍需要更長任期來完成他的使命。”(我說的是：但應不會是最後修憲，因為目前修憲後的體制仍不能保證可以在他之後平順運作。我沒有用「使命」兩字。)

●林中斌表示，習近平主掌的大陸不像新加坡，也不像完全專制集權，如果前5年沒有人民支持與參與不能完成打貪反腐。(我說的是：這5年來辛苦的打貪成績，未來在習之後若無人民的監督，將付諸東流。我沒有說：前5年沒有人民支持與參與不能完成打貪反腐。)

●西方民主有出現很多問題和缺點，像川普沒有人把他推下來，普丁也是，民主模式要新思考，兩個制度還在比賽中。(我說的是：西方民主制度下，川普支持度只有35%至41%，可是沒有人把他推下來。而普丁支持度高達80%，不只是俄羅斯民調如是說，西方在俄羅斯所做民調也如此)

●林中斌認為習近平會長期執政，習認為國家完全統一是三大歷史任務之一，(我沒有說：習認為國家完全統一是三大歷史任務之一)

●民調認為我是台灣人比例下降，台灣人對統獨比例也逐漸反轉，要獨立的人變少，要統一的人變多，(我還說了：雖然現在支持獨立的仍高於支持統一，但假以時日，未來就很難說)

林中斌 2018.03.13

（20：20更新）前陸委會副主委、國防部副部長林中斌13日指出，大陸絕不會對台武統，會繼續以兩手策略，軟的是主是實，硬的是輔是虛。他認為蔡政府可走向與大陸談，但要爭取對台灣最好的條件。

林中斌接受《POP撞新聞》主持人黃清龍訪問時說，中共修憲，把習近平思想入憲，國家主席的任期取消。能確定習近平會延任，但應不會是最後修憲，因為目前修憲後的體制仍不能保證可以在他之後平順運作。

林中斌表示，習近平主掌的大陸不像新加坡，也不像完全專制集權，這5年來辛苦的打貪成績，未來在習之後若無人民的監督，將付諸東流。北京一直在參考新加坡模式，創出自己的模式。現在修憲把三個領導（指中共總書記、軍委主席及國家主席）合一，主席是最沒有權力的一個，下一個應會追求總統制，十九大後權力穩固元老凋零，比較能穩定操作。西方民主制度下，川普支持度只有35%至41%，可是沒有人把他推下來。而普丁支持度高達80%，不只是俄羅斯民調如是說，西方在俄羅斯所做民調也如此。

他說，習近平的新體制外媒稱為北京模式，還沒有看到全面，是一種威權而有效的體制，是一種賢能政治，西方自由式民主出了大問題，但是習把孔孟甚至王陽明請回來，與毛澤東完全不一樣，把整個體制完全翻過來，這是一種全新的體制。

林中斌認為習近平會長期執政，而在他任期內會不會出現兩岸統一？他說，統一是漫長的過程，遲早要與台灣領導人見面。台灣的民意也在改變，民調認為我是台灣人比例下降，台灣人對統獨比例也逐漸反轉，要獨立的人變少，要統一的人變多，雖然現在支持獨立的仍高於支持統一，但假以時日，未來就很難說。人民願到大陸工作，綠營媒體也不否認是趨勢也出現憂慮。

他強調，大陸絕對不會有武統，他很早就說大陸買台灣比打台灣便宜，超軍事手段，北京大戰略對世界對台灣都一樣，硬的強化其軍事軍備，像軍機軍艦繞台、對台外交封殺，目的是反獨，真正促統要民心，兩手策略軟的是主是實，硬的是輔是虛。一國兩制還是方案。

「老西，我雞道」

Andreas Whittome（魏安德）自由時報 March 12, 2018

http://talk.ltn.com.tw/article/paper/1183066

accessed March 12, 2018

自由時報已非吳下阿蒙。

林中斌 2018.3.12

本月七日曾泰元教授投書「廢注音，採拼音？」一文，本人身為在國外的中文教師，想分享一些看法與經驗。

葉宜津委員指的應該是中國大陸發明的漢語拼音。現在世界上幾乎所有的中文學生都使用漢語拼音並且學簡體中文，除了台灣當地的學生以外。我認為廢除注音符號很可惜，假如廢除正體字就更可惜了，兩種廢除都好像廢除了華人文化核心的一部分一樣。

其實漢語拼音雖然對西方人來說很方便，但沒有注音符號準確。注音符號是接近完美的一套系統，反之漢語拼音有些缺點，導致外國人經常把某些音都念錯。例如漢語拼音裡的ｉ有時候念「ㄧ」，有時候不念「ㄧ」，比如jī念「ㄐㄧ」可是shī念「ㄕ」，導致很多外國學生把「師」念成「西」，把「知」念成「雞」。很多學生會把「老師，我知道」說成「老西，我雞道」。

注音符號可以避免這種錯誤發生，因為每個注音符號都代表一個固定的音：「ㄌㄠˇ ㄕ，ㄨㄛˇ ㄓ ㄉㄠˋ」就很清楚。現在在台灣的華語中心也採用漢語拼音。我還是認為對在台灣學中文的外國人來說，學注音符號是很值得的。原因是台灣人都掌握注音符號（反之中國人不一定能掌握好他們自己的漢語拼音）。

我以前在台灣學中文時，有時因為對方不捲舌而聽不懂。比如對方把「政治」念成「贈字」（ㄗㄥˋ ㄗˋ），這種場合我常常會請對方用注音符號把這個詞的發音寫下來。很奇妙的是：他雖然念得不正確還是會很正確地寫下注音符號的「ㄓㄥˋ ㄓˋ」。我就說「啊，政治！」他就說「對，對，對，贈字！」不僅有趣，也很有幫助。因此，希望台灣會保留此久經考驗的好系統！

【心理戰】中國祭大規模惠台措施　學者：施壓已到飽和點

蘋果日報 March 08, 2018

https://tw.appledaily.com/new/realtime/20180308/1310427/?utm_source=FB&utm_medium=MWeb_Share&utm_campaign=https%3A%2F%2Ftw.appledaily.com%2Fnew%2Frealtime%2F20180308%2F1310427%2F

accessed March 09, 2018

記者錯誤引述。

●我沒有說兩會後北京會使更多台灣邦交國轉向。正巧相反，我說北京發現臺灣人民對巴拿馬轉向無感，以後暫時不會用同樣招數，梵諦崗除外。梵諦崗若轉向，不是為打壓台灣，而是提升北京國際形相。

●我也沒說北京機艦繞臺使"蔡英文越來越氣憤"。蔡總統情緒非外人能知，包括在下。我說的是:北京硬手只能防獨，不能促統。所以北京現在兩手對台，以軟手為主，硬手為輔。

●我懷疑VOA英文訪問中我所說的英文有人聽來有困難。

林中斌 2018.3.9

中國政府最近釋出31項惠台措施，國務院總理李克強在最新的工作報告中，也表示中國主張「和平發展」兩岸關係。對此，學者分析認為，中國大陸日前一連串的施壓動作已呈現「飽和」狀態，對台態度也因此緩和。

國防部前副部長林中斌向美國之音記者表示，中國對台灣的態度在1月份開始緩和，因為他們覺得已經達到了「飽和」點。文中指出，隨著北京派軍機繞台飛行、縮減赴台團體旅遊、打壓台灣國際空間，使得蔡英文總統越來越氣憤而不是越來越接近中國。

林中斌認為，中國政府可能透過自己的民調得知有不少台灣人願意在中國工作或學習。他說，中國放寬台灣人赴大陸工作、學習和投資的條件直接影響台灣公民，不需要台灣官員的支援：「不像前任中國國家主席胡錦濤採取的那些至少需要台灣當局的合作與參與的措施，新的措施都不需要台灣的參與。」

但林中斌也警告，一旦人大會議在3月中旬結束，台灣就會看到中國恢復外交壓力，屆時將會有更多台灣的外國盟友轉向中國。

派克策略公司（Park Strategies）副總裁金恩（Sean King）則分析，習近平透過修憲延長執政時間後，「只會進一步疏遠台灣人，因此更不可能讓蔡英文做出任何讓步」。

惠台措施／林中斌：軟硬兩手策略

林宸誼 經濟日報 March 03, 2018

https://money.udn.com/money/story/5648/3009636

accessed March 03, 2018

未登的還有:台灣11月後民調顯示北京軟手已有效果連自由時報都不否認。進一步說，北京對台軟手為實，硬手為虛。台灣民意改變，將改變政府兩岸方向。

林中斌 2018.03.03

大陸公布31條惠台措施，淡江大學大陸研究所副教授張五岳表示，這次相當聚焦，就是爭取更多台灣高新技術企業和人才，到大陸不僅是投資，而且能夠在大陸落地生根設立研發總部。

前華府喬治城大學外交學院講座教授、曾任國防部副部長林中斌則提醒，從今年1月以來，中共對台採「軟為主，硬為輔的兩手策略」。

大陸國台辦2月28日公布31項「惠台措施」，範圍包括產業、金融、就業、教育等領域。學者指出，大陸措施是希望能爭取到吸引力會比較強，但從政策公布到落實貫徹，需要一個過程，短期效應有待觀察。

張五岳指出，台灣年輕人目前面臨低薪環境，或是欠缺發展的龐大市場空間，選擇到大陸從事相關行業工作意願，會比其他年齡層來的高。

張五岳認為，單就教育領域來看，如果同樣在台灣和大陸找教育工作，絕大部分台灣人會留在台灣而不會去大陸，大陸高教不會對台清交有吸引力，但在台灣找不到工作的流浪博士，或是私立學校經營不善、面臨倒閉必須承擔很大招生壓力的老師，就會選擇去大陸工作。

張五岳表示，政府應該創造有競爭力的企業，創造跟大陸同等環境，才能吸引企業和人才留在台灣。

林中斌對大陸推出惠台措施並不意外，他說，「台灣的人才早已經流失」。

他認為，中共對台採「軟為主，硬為輔的兩手策略」。硬的部分，像之前軍機軍艦繞台，今年1月以來明顯減弱，即使有也淡化處理；軟的一手在擴大，直接拉近與台灣民眾距離，要達到「心靈契合」。

中國力推31惠台措施 林中斌：北京硬的一手放緩，軟的一手在擴大

德國之聲 風傳媒 March 01, 2018

http://www.storm.mg/article/404521

accessed March 01, 2018

記者錯置在下目前為淡江大學教授，時間隧道倒退六年。

其他報導的淺見敬請賜正。

林中斌 2018.3.1

中國國台辦公布了31條新的惠台措施，稱新規讓台企在多領域與陸企享受同等待遇。專家分析認為，旨在吸引台灣企業和專業人才前往中國大陸發展的這些措施，對企業和個人帶來利好，但會讓台灣面臨人才和人心的流失。

中國國台辦公周三（2月28日）在例行記者會上公布了《關於促進兩岸經濟文化交流合作的若干措施》，國台辦發言人安峰山在當日的例行新聞發布會上表示，相關措施涵蓋多領域，開放力度大、範圍廣、涉及部門多前所未有，「將切實擴大台企台胞特別是基層民眾的受益面和獲得感」。

台灣中央社報道稱之為農歷春節過後，中國對台經濟文化攻勢的「開春第一炮」。中國官方媒體也強調惠台措施的目的是「著力為台企台胞提供與大陸企業、大陸同胞同等的待遇」。

此次公布的31條措施中，12條涉及加快給予台資企業與大陸企業同等待遇，主要包括：明確台資企業參與「中國製造2025」、享受稅收優惠政策、參與國家重點研發計劃項目、基礎設施建設、政府採購和國有企業混合所有制改革等享有與大陸企業同等待遇等。

另有19條措施涉及為台籍人士在大陸學習、創業、就業、生活提供與大陸同胞同等待遇，主要包括：向台灣同胞開放134項國家職業資格考試，為台灣人士取得從業資格和在大陸應聘提供更多便利。

台灣實踐大學國際與兩岸政治學者賴岳謙對德國之聲表示，大陸惠台的步伐和格局將會越來越大。鑑於目前大陸經濟成長的速度，台灣的綜合實力與大陸差距越來越大，這會對台灣的人才產生很大的磁吸效應。但他認為，台灣人不管是在台灣、美國還是在中國大陸取得成功，對台灣都是好事。

根據新公布的惠台措施，中國還將放寬台灣影視、圖書等市場准入限制，包括台灣人士參與中國廣播電視節目和電影、電視劇製作可不受數量限制；中國電影發行機構、廣播電視台、視聽網站引進台灣生產的電影、電視劇不做數量限制。

台灣淡江大學國際事務和戰略研究所的林中斌教授對北京現在推出惠台措施並不意外。他用「軟為主，硬為輔的兩手策略」來概括中共十九大以來的對台政策。「硬的一手，特別是軍機軍艦繞台，今年以來明顯減弱，即便有軍方也作淡化處理。軟的一手則在擴大，這操持在北京一方，不需要台北政府的任何合作與配合。」

負責大陸事務的台灣陸委會周三就北京公布的惠台措施表示，以利益換取台灣的政治認同，是陸方整體對台政策的一環，大陸方面長期以來反覆推出多種類似措施，目的在提升單方獲益的經濟發展目標、吸納台灣的資源，並希望以利益換取台灣的政治認同。

林中斌指出，去年11月以來台灣各大機構、媒體，包括聯合報、天下雜誌，甚至綠色的台灣民意基金的民調都顯示了台灣民意的轉變。對台獨的支持下降；認同「我是中國人，也是台灣人」的比例上升，「我是台灣人」則下降；願意赴大陸工作、送子女到大陸求學的人增加，「這些連自由時報這樣的綠色媒體都不再否認。」

「北京覺察到，向蔡英文個人施壓是沒有用的，因此改為從基本面做起，試圖改變台灣的民意。」林中斌補充說，北京還改變了過去「埋單式」對台灣輸送紅利的做法，「過去是讓台灣和大陸的官員賺很多錢，這是習近平深惡痛絕的，他上台後就完全停止了。」

兩位學者都認為，在目前情況下北京尚不會考慮武力功台這一選項。賴岳謙更認為習近平不會脫離實現和平統一的道路。

台灣陸委會強調，兩岸在制度、法規、市場環境及理念價值等有所差異，企業及民眾在參與前應謹慎評估可能存在的成本風險與效應，以維護自身權益及安全。陸委會還表示將持續關注後續發展，及對台灣相關產業及人才的可能影響。

兩岸不會更嚴峻

February 27, 2018

●十九大後北京對台兩手，軟手助攻，硬手輔攻。

●目的是改變台灣民意。

●效果根據藍綠民調，在2017.11後已浮現。

●2017年10月，天下雜誌臉書官網丟出問題："你願不願意赴大陸工作？" 回答願意的佔75%。據常識判斷，上臉書回答問題的多為年輕人。

●北京認識到：一味施壓蔡英文無用。

●北京關注：蔡英文是否能權威的號令民進黨？不確定。更何況，她是否能權威的號令全台灣?

●新內閣任命強化國際兩岸之實際經驗。未來她身邊對國際兩岸的雷達更為靈敏。如果陳菊願接總統府秘書長，蔡可對黨內諸侯更有辦法。

●李大維掌國安，更能警示國際危機。2017.2.17他說"釣魚台是中華民國領土。是首位民進黨政府部長如此說的。李長期在歐美歷練，今日在職外交官難出其右。李一向不恥下問。一月底，李尚私下請教台大某大陸情勢專家(他不上媒體，是修行人)。

●陳明通在阿扁時代已去過對岸卅多次。對兩岸未來整合的大趨勢曾低調表示很難抗拒，意味能做的是儘量爭取對台最佳條件。何況2016.5.20後，他低調進行研究兩岸談判(是否受命不知)，還低調去北京數次。據悉，陳在十九大前上呈總統報告曾準確預測7常委。

林中斌2018.2.27

China's J-16 Jets Stepping Up Introduction Into Service

Mike Yeo Defense News, January 10, 2018

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/01/10/images-reveal-chinas-j-16-jets-stepping-up-introduction-into-service/

accessed February 5, 2018

●解放軍殲16戰機開始服役

林中斌 2018.02.05

MELBOURNE, Australia — China’s new Shenyang J-16 multirole fighter jet has been entering service in increasing numbers with little fanfare, with the lion’s share of attention focused on the stealthy Chengdu J-20 fighter’s development and introduction.

Images released by the Chinese military of a recent parade and exercise at Cangzhou in China’s northeastern Hebei province in early January show that at least two other People’s Liberation Army Air Force, or PLAAF, air brigades have converted or are in the process of converting to the J-16, bringing the total to three such units known to have the type into service.

This includes the 172nd and 176th brigades of the PLAAF’s Flight Test and Training Center, which is “assigned the task of developing flight techniques, combat tactics and training program for new aircraft and equipment,” according to Andreas Rupprecht, who has authored a number of books on Chinese military aviation.

The serial number on the aircraft at the recent exercise indicates that the third unit operating the J-16 is the 98th Brigade based at Chongqing in China’s southwest. There have also been reports from China that the 7th Brigade at Wuhu, Anhui province, is operating the J-16, although Defense News has been unable to confirm this.

A small number of J-16s entered service with the Flight Test and Training Center’s 176th Brigade in 2015 for the PLAAF equivalent of operational testing and evaluation; however multiple sources have said the wider introduction of the type into PLAAF service was reportedly delayed due to the need to refine the design of its active electronically scanned array radar developed by China’s No. 607 Institute.

The Shenyang J-16 is an indigenously developed Chinese offshoot of the Russian Su-30 Flanker-C multirole fighter, which is also operated by the PLAAF and China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy. Unlike the Shenyang J-11B/BS, which is a dedicated air combat aircraft based on the earlier Sukhoi Su-27, the J-16 is configured for both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions with its multimode AESA radar.

Like the J-11B/BS, the J-16 is powered by the Chinese WS-10 Taihang turbofan engine. However, the J-16 has a provision for in-flight refueling, an infrared search and track system offset to the right of the canopy, and twin nose wheels to cope with a higher maximum takeoff weight, and it lacks a pitot tube on its nose cone.

An electronic attack version, tentatively designated J-16D, is under development, with at least one prototype known to have made a number of test flights.

No Longer Just Catch-up

The Economist, February 17, 2018

accessed February 17, 2018

●倫敦經濟學人稱中國將佈署戰機與飛彈比美西方最佳之武器

●殲20將比F-35航行距離更遠

林中斌 2018.02.17

Can Donald Trump accept a defeat

in Afghanistan?

February 10, 2018

-美國史上最長的戰爭16年了，還在持續!
-川普又在阿富汗增加美國軍隊!
-但是川普移轉對巴基斯坦的支持,停止援助，而支持印度。
-巴基斯坦更不願意為美國犧牲。
-巴國情報組織竟然訓練了至少一位神學士，1月20日殺了旅館裡40人。
-請問"美國優先"原則如何在阿富汗使用?
-繼續燒美國納稅人的錢以無限延長這"昂貴的僵局"?
-還是川普將接受失敗，怪罪前任總統?
-那麼，還要等多久?

林中斌 試摘錄簡譯。2018.2.10

Can Donald Trump Accept a Defeat In Afghanistan?

The Taliban and ISIS killed at least 140 people in January in a wave of attacks inside Kabul, Afghanistan’s capital. It’s a reminder that this 16-year war, the longest in U.S. history, rages on. At least 30,000 Afghan civilians and more than 2,200 U.S. soldiers have died. As attacks mount, it’s time to take a longer look at the U.S. goals in Afghanistan.

President Trump has tried to show positive results. He has deferred to his generals on how best to achieve strategic goals and put thousands of additional troops on the ground. Afghanistan has a reasonably strong government in Kabul under the leadership of President Ashraf Ghani.

It hasn’t helped. The Trump Administration has at the same time shifted support away from Pakistan in favor of closer relations with India. U.S. aid to Pakistan has been suspended, giving its military and security services fewer reasons to accept sacrifice and risks to help U.S.-led troops in Afghanistan. Pakistan may even have provoked recent attacks; an Afghan diplomat claimed that Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, had trained one of the Taliban militants who killed 40 people in a hotel attack on Jan. 20.

Everyone in the region knows that the U.S. cannot stay forever. There are now about 14,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, compared with 100,000 in 2011. At some point, the last Americans will go home, just as the Soviets marched out in 1989, and Afghanistan will again be an arena in which Pakistan, India and Iran jostle for position.

George W. Bush’s rationale for starting the war in 2001 was clear: the Taliban, then in charge in Kabul, refused to surrender Osama bin Laden, who had just ordered the murder of thousands of Americans on U.S. soil. Today’s question for Trump is equally clear: How can this war be won? Presidents Bush and Obama were never able to answer that question.

A second question for Trump: What does “America first” mean for U.S. policy in Afghanistan? Do American taxpayers care about what happens there? Both parties in Congress have supported efforts to help the Afghan government control enough territory to ensure that terrorists find no new safe haven from which to attack Western targets. But that government still lacks the resources and the country still lacks the infrastructure needed to achieve that goal. The result is a violent, expensive stalemate. If Trump stops sending troops and money, the Afghan government will collapse. If the troops and dollars continue to flow, Washington will be paying to extend the stalemate.

Can Donald Trump accept a defeat, even one he can blame on his predecessors? And how long will it take him to decide?